Ominous Philly-KC trade possibility?

2020 Patriots Season:
Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: at Chargers
Pick Results: NE: 90.4% at LAC: 9.6%

Sun
Dec 6th

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:
Status
Not open for further replies.

BPF

In the Starting Line-Up
I think the more likely scenario is KC trading down to 5 with Cleveland, picking up a high 2nd they lost to the Pats + other considerations. The Browns take Curry and the Chiefs take Monroe if he's available or Raji if Seattle takes Monroe. Cleveland has two 2nd's and I feel would be willing to take Curry that high. I don't believe Pioli will take a LB in a position where he would have to pay him $30 mil in guaranteed money. OL and DL is a different story from a $$ value proposition.
 
T

TealSox

Guest
You may be right, but Philly has a gaping hole at LT. Unless they can trade for Jason Peters, they may be desperate enough to trade up. McNabb can run, but he still needs a decent LT to protect him.

This wasn't meant to be a B****n thread. But I generally wouldn't like the idea of Scott Pioli picking right in front of us for our first 2 picks, as he could easily target defensive players that we might like.

I think the Eagles would be better off by (1) trading for Jason Peters of the Bills, (2) trading a 1st and third for Anquan Boldin and (3) drafting Knowshon Moreno or Chris Wells with the other first round pick.

That sounds like a pretty solid offense for McNabb to make a run with when you couple in Westbrook and DeSean Jackson. In a later round they can draft Shawn Nelson or Jared Cook to round out the tight end position.
 

mayoclinic

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I think the more likely scenario is KC trading down to 5 with Cleveland, picking up a high 2nd they lost to the Pats + other considerations. The Browns take Curry and the Chiefs take Monroe if he's available or Raji if Seattle takes Monroe. Cleveland has two 2nd's and I feel would be willing to take Curry that high. I don't believe Pioli will take a LB in a position where he would have to pay him $30 mil in guaranteed money. OL and DL is a different story from a $$ value proposition.

Exactly right. So why would Cleveland trade up to get a LB who they would have to pay $30M in guaranteed money, who may still fall to them anyway?

I think there's a good chance Curry falls a bit, mainly because teams won't want to pay $30M in guaranteed money to an LB, particularly one who is not a demon pass rusher. I think Detroit takes Stafford #1, St. Louis Jason Smith (or possibly Monroe) #2, and either KC takes Monroe #3 or trades down to someone who wants either Mark Sanchez or the remaining OT. Seattle then takes whichever one is left of Sanchez or the Smith/Monroe OT, leaving Cleveland to choose between Michael Crabtree, Aaron Curry and Brian Orapko at #5. The Browns are rumored to love Crabtree, so they might even pass on Curry at #5, much less trade up for him.
 

ctpatsfan77

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Actually it was the Exact opposite. Mayo was their man and the Pats traded down from #7 to #10 because #7 was to high for Mayo. Value is everything, that is why everybody and their mother wants to trade back.

More likely, the Patriots felt that either Mayo was likely to still be there at #10, or there was another player they'd be willing to draft/move they'd be willing to make there if Mayo was gone.

If New Orleans hadn't come calling, they may still have taken Mayo at #7 anyways.
 

mayoclinic

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I think the Eagles would be better off by (1) trading for Jason Peters of the Bills, (2) trading a 1st and third for Anquan Boldin and (3) drafting Knowshon Moreno or Chris Wells with the other first round pick.

That sounds like a pretty solid offense for McNabb to make a run with when you couple in Westbrook and DeSean Jackson. In a later round they can draft Shawn Nelson or Jared Cook to round out the tight end position.

I'm not sure how they would do that. Arizona is reportedly asking a 1st and a 3rd for Boldin. Buffalo is reportedly seeking a 1st for Peters. How would they be able to trade for both and still draft Wells or Moreno.
 

dryheat44

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
This may seem a bit far fetched, but I think there is a serious possibility of Philadelphia trading #21 and #28 (and possibly a bit more thrown in, such as the #159 pick they got from New England) to KC for the #3 pick.

At first blush, this seems ridiculous. The #3 pick is valued at 2200 points. #21 + #28 are valued together at 1440 points, or a 760 point difference. The #159 pick from New England would still leave Philly over 700 points short.

While it's true teams in the first round are trying to trade down, and are willing to take a steep discount to do so, that seems to apply more to the teams slotted in the #7-#14 range. With the elite players in the top 5 or so, I don't expect Pioli to take such a drastic discount. Monroe or Smith will have many suitors if Pioli wants to trade the pick, and maybe Pioli just decides to draft Monroe and have his starting LT position nailed down for the next decade if he doesn't get what he deems fair value.

If Philly were to make the trade up, it would likely cost them the two first rounders and either a player or two off the roster or next year's first or second rounder.
 

Revman

Practice Squad Player
I think Eagles will move up-not to 3. I stated last week that The Eagles will move far enough to grab Andre Smith.. Even Michael Oher could be had from 10-14 area-which is where I think they can get Andre Smith as well. I Don't expect them to go up to 3.
 

CoachK

Practice Squad Player
Yes, I typed that wrong. I meant that they 'reached' for him, not that they traded up. My apologies. He was pegged to go lower, but they pulled the trigger anyway. I'd read a comment in another thread and gotten a bit distracted by someone being a smartass about Mayo being called a reach.

I'm not sure how drafting the DROY at # 10 is a "reach".
 

Deus Irae

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club
PatsFans.com Supporter
I'm not sure how drafting the DROY at # 10 is a "reach".

Because "reach" has nothing to do with how well a draft pick plays after he's been chosen. It has to do with where he was taken in the draft. Tom Brady is the G.O.A.T. but, had he been drafted in round 1, it would have been a reach of epic proportions.
 

mayoclinic

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I think Eagles will move up-not to 3. I stated last week that The Eagles will move far enough to grab Andre Smith.. Even Michael Oher could be had from 10-14 area-which is where I think they can get Andre Smith as well. I Don't expect them to go up to 3.

Quite possible, though I doubt Andre Smith lasts past Washington at #13, and I think he goes top 10.

BTW, Michael Lombardi's latest mock is out, with the Pats taking Vontae Davis. I'm on my cell so I can't paste the link from here.
 

dryheat44

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
Quite possible, though I doubt Andre Smith lasts past Washington at #13, and I think he goes top 10.

BTW, Michael Lombardi's latest mock is out, with the Pats taking Vontae Davis. I'm on my cell so I can't paste the link from here.

Lombardi knows Belichick very well, so I find that very interesting. I'll have to see how that mock fell.
 

dryheat44

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
Problem solved. Philly just acquired Jason Peters for the #28 pick, and late rounders in '09 and '10
 

BPF

In the Starting Line-Up
Exactly right. So why would Cleveland trade up to get a LB who they would have to pay $30M in guaranteed money, who may still fall to them anyway?

I think there's a good chance Curry falls a bit, mainly because teams won't want to pay $30M in guaranteed money to an LB, particularly one who is not a demon pass rusher. I think Detroit takes Stafford #1, St. Louis Jason Smith (or possibly Monroe) #2, and either KC takes Monroe #3 or trades down to someone who wants either Mark Sanchez or the remaining OT. Seattle then takes whichever one is left of Sanchez or the Smith/Monroe OT, leaving Cleveland to choose between Michael Crabtree, Aaron Curry and Brian Orapko at #5. The Browns are rumored to love Crabtree, so they might even pass on Curry at #5, much less trade up for him.

Well for one they are already at #5 not 21 & 28 so they are going to have to pay a big bonus to some player and secondly Mangini has shown in the past that he is ok w/drafting LBs high while Pioli does not. If Curry is sitting there at #5 you can bet the Browns will take him, the only reason you are reading about Crabtree is because it's a smokescreen. If Curry is not available or they can't trade up for him they will trade down and want the teams considering Crabtree to think they want him.

With Philly trading #28 to the Bills your proposed deal is off the table anyway: FOX Sports on MSN - NFL - Sources: Eagles trade for Bills Pro Bowl LT Peters
 
Last edited:

BPF

In the Starting Line-Up
Lombardi knows Belichick very well, so I find that very interesting. I'll have to see how that mock fell.

That's exactly why he won't list any of the players the Pats are interested in at 23 or why he has Davis going to the Pats. There is no chance the Pats take Davis in the 1st Rd.
 

Ochmed Jones

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
Problem solved. Philly just acquired Jason Peters for the #28 pick, and late rounders in '09 and '10

If this deal goes down, it is a very smart move for Philly. Maybe Philly used the threat of the trade to goat Buffalo into making a deal.
 

mayoclinic

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
If this deal goes down, it is a very smart move for Philly. Maybe Philly used the threat of the trade to goat Buffalo into making a deal.

I think its a good move given that Philly really needs a starting caliber LT for September. Jason Peters seems like a good fit for them too. He was definitely better before his holdout, but he certainly has the talent. Interesting to see what Buffalo will do at #11 and #28. Obviously if Oher or Andre Smith fall past 10 I think the Bills would jump at one of them, and then target TE or DE at 28.
 
T

TealSox

Guest
I'm not sure how they would do that. Arizona is reportedly asking a 1st and a 3rd for Boldin. Buffalo is reportedly seeking a 1st for Peters. How would they be able to trade for both and still draft Wells or Moreno.

I was surprised that Peters was traded for a first round pick. I don't think a left tackle is worth a first round in this years draft class because you can find a left tackle in the first round to contribute in his rookie year. Britton and Beatty would be nice pick-ups with the 28th pick and would had been cheaper. You could go another step and take a guy like Alex Mack and move him to tackle.

This is where I start the agrument of which veteran positions are worth in the draft. Considering a rookie WR and rookie (esp. junior) QB take time to develop, a venture to propose a veteran WR is worth more than a veteran left tackle.
 

dryheat44

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
I was surprised that Peters was traded for a first round pick. I don't think a left tackle is worth a first round in this years draft class because you can find a left tackle in the first round to contribute in his rookie year. Britton and Beatty would be nice pick-ups with the 28th pick and would had been cheaper. You could go another step and take a guy like Alex Mack and move him to tackle.

This is where I start the agrument of which veteran positions are worth in the draft. Considering a rookie WR and rookie (esp. junior) QB take time to develop, a venture to propose a veteran WR is worth more than a veteran left tackle.


Wow...I respectfully disagree with every single thing you say above....with the exception that Beatty would be a nice pick-up with the 28th pick.
 
Last edited:

mayoclinic

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I was surprised that Peters was traded for a first round pick. I don't think a left tackle is worth a first round in this years draft class because you can find a left tackle in the first round to contribute in his rookie year. Britton and Beatty would be nice pick-ups with the 28th pick and would had been cheaper. You could go another step and take a guy like Alex Mack and move him to tackle.

This is where I start the agrument of which veteran positions are worth in the draft. Considering a rookie WR and rookie (esp. junior) QB take time to develop, a venture to propose a veteran WR is worth more than a veteran left tackle.

Hmm. A couple of stretches here.

First, a potential pro bowl caliber LT is always worth a 1st round pick. There are no sure things in the draft - Robert Gallery went #2 and didn't pan out. LT is a safer bet than other things, but with the cost of getting a potential franchise LT and the risk involved, trading for a proven one seems quite reasonable. Part of why I'm willing to take a shot at Wiliam Beatty if he slides to 23 or 34 is that it's almost impossible to get a pro bowl caliber LT that late in the draft, and it's not unreasonable to take a chance on one even if they need a year or two of development.

Second, I can't fathom how a veteran WR would possibly be more than a veteran LT of similar caliber. Lt is simply a more valuable position, hands down.

Finally, I like Alex Mack a lot, but he will never be an OT, not to mention a LT.

Other than that, I agree with everything you say. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top